Wolff and Holden

[2012] FMCAfam 924

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

WOLFF & HOLDEN [2012] FMCAfam 924

FAMILY LAW – Defacto Relationship – s.90RD declaration as to the end date of the asserted relationship – no jurisdiction – application dismissed.

Family Law Act 1975, ss.4AA, 90RB, 90RD
Family Law Amendment (De Facto Financial Matters and Other Measures) Act 2008

Baker & Landon [2010] FMCAfam 280
Moby v Schulter [2010] FLC 923-447
Roy v Sturgeon [1986] DFC 95-031
Simonis v Perpetual Trustee Co Ltd [1987] 21 NSWLR 677
Light v Anderson [1992] DFC 95-102
Jonah & White [2011] FamCA 221
Ricci & Jones [2011] FamCAFC 222
Taisha & Peng and Anor [2012] FamCA 385

Applicant: MS WOLFF

Respondent: MF HOLDEN

File Number: SYC 349 of 2012

Judgment of: Foster FM

Hearing date: 10 August 2012

Date of Last Submission: 10 September 2012

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 13 September 2012

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Jackson

Solicitors for the Applicant: Accentro Legal

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr Cairn

Solicitors for the Respondent: Phang Legal

ORDERS

1. That pursuant to s.90RD of the Act the court declares that the defacto relationship between the applicant and respondent ended in January 2006.

2. That the application filed by the applicant on 24 January 2012 as amended be dismissed.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Wolff & Holden is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYC 349 of 2012

MS WOLFF

Applicant

And

MF HOLDEN

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

The Proceedings

1. These are proceedings arising out of an alleged de facto relationship. The applicant de facto wife seeks orders as set out in the amended application filed on 8 June 2012 as to property adjustment and de facto spousal maintenance. Further she seeks interim orders for de facto spousal maintenance and interim property orders and including an order requiring the respondent de facto husband to meet continuing mortgage payments in relation to the property occupied by the applicant in [H] in Sydney.

2. The respondent de facto husband seeks:

   a)declaratory relief to the effect that the parties resided in a de facto relationship between 2002 and 2006, that the applicant did not make any substantial contribution to the acquisition, conservation and improvement of any property subject of these proceedings and that the applicant would not suffer any serious injustice by reason of no property adjustment orders being made in her favour;

   b)that the application be dismissed for want of jurisdiction;

   c)costs;

   d)that otherwise orders sought by the applicant be dismissed.

3. Proceedings were first listed before the court on 21 March 2012. On that day the matter was adjourned for further directions to 7 May 2012. Further the respondent was ordered to file a response, financial statement and affidavit in support of orders sought by him by 27 April 2012. The applicant was ordered to file any further affidavit material relied upon as to the existence of the relationship sufficient to attract the court’s jurisdiction…